3 Comments
User's avatar
abtan's avatar

Interesting thoughts on AAF.

I've always been put off by how the company used EBITDA.

In the past it excluded the high interest payments on the massive debt pile, which really didn't make sense for me. There's also massive capex expenditure every year (or at least there was a few years ago.)

The only way they were able to keep paying dividends was because they were using the growing customer cash balances.

That's a dangerous position and one that always put me off.

I haven't looked at the company in detail for a while now, but I imagine the situation hasn't changed.

On your point about regulation, I seem to recall Uganda or Rwanda (?) requiring a domestic listing as well, or something to that affect. It was a minor red flag, though I'm afraid that I can't remember why I thought that at the time! And maybe it's happened already.

I'll certainly look at their results the next time they publish something - maybe the situation has improved since I last looked at it.

Expand full comment
Bill Graham's avatar

Hi there. Tried to reply to your Camellia post, but a glitch in the system won't allow it. Just to say I totally agree with your analysis, but I reckon you can rely on the management to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Please beware!

Expand full comment
Boon Koh's avatar

That's true. I think management haw very little credibility. In any other organisation, they would have been booted out by now.

I'm thinking of Camellia as a short term play, as I think once we have a normal agriculture trading year, the market will close the TNAV gap quite substantially. The share buybacks should also be sufficient amount to push the natural price up over the next few months, given how illiquid this share is.

There's potentially another £20m cash to come from the sale of the Linton Park estate. Imagine if they then extend the share buyback for another £20m. Chunky reduction of shares over two years on a £130 market cap.

Expand full comment